The Town Hall Archives Ahh, the nostalgia.     Search   Memberlist   Log in  Catholics Vs. Evangelicals      The Town Hall Forum Index -> Impolite Company Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next View previous topic :: View next topic   Author Message rosie Inquisitive Member Joined: 07 Jan 2003 Posts: 1197 Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:35 pm    Post subject: Nice list, Coralfish. I totally agree with you. The canned answer around here seems to be "Catholicism is not a christian denomination, but catholics can be christians." I totally disagree with that. They follow God as much as anyone else, and percentagewise, they probably have about the same number of true christians in their congregations. Maybe I'm biased, but I have a friend who is a Nun. My family says "awww, that's so sad", but I know it's God's will for her. You should see her glow. Coralfish, I'm wondering why you included Jews in your defense? Do they believe that Jesus died to save us from our sins? I'm impressed with how you view protestants, but I'm wondering, do you reffer to people who haven't been baptised yet as your protestant brothers and sisters? Coralfish Town Hall Judge Joined: 17 Dec 2002 Posts: 1790 Location: Southern Academia Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:46 pm    Post subject: rosie wrote: Coralfish, I'm wondering why you included Jews in your defense? Do they believe that Jesus died to save us from our sins? Hehe, no. My list regarded Catholics in particular. However, as far as Jews are concerned (and perhaps why you don't hear much about Jewish evangalization) is that they are concerned with conversion of non-believers rather than Christians. Interestingly enough, Jews do hold, for the most part, that Christians have been saved because they found God. And that's what concerns them primarily. Therefore, they tend to focus a bit more on those who either reject or simply don't believe in God. Though I do not expressly defend the Jewish faith (as I believe it lacks some essential elements), I do applaud their realization of these things. rosie wrote: I'm impressed with how you view protestants, but I'm wondering, do you reffer to people who haven't been baptised yet as your protestant brothers and sisters? Well, I have a hard time knowing who in ever protestant denomination has been baptized, but yes, in pointing out how they are generally addressed both in sermons and in general, this is fairly common. The point? I'd venture its to promote unity in Christ. It's so easy (whatever be your particular Christian affinity) to be caught up in the resentment that tends to follow disagreement. Thus, it also mantians a sense of respect that [all] Christians deserve from one another. Its part of the way we strive to be, is it not? Arwen Really Likes Personalized Ranks Joined: 12 Jul 2003 Posts: 1193 Location: The Middle of Nowhere Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 2:05 pm    Post subject: I have not been baptised yet, though I want to be soon. However, I'm still a Christian, and if I were to die today, I'd be with the Lord. Jeremy The Great Debater Joined: 03 Jan 2003 Posts: 448 Location: Arizona, USA Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:21 pm    Post subject: Jonathan wrote: Jeremy wrote: They fit all of the things I described. If you would like me to try to explain in what ways they fit the things I described, I'll try, but not tonight. ;-) Jeremy Yeah, that's what I meant. An explanation would make it easier for me to understand. -Jonathan Here is a good resource explaining why Catholicism is a cult: http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Cults/ (especially the article under "Roman Catholicism" called "Roman Catholicism: Is It A Cult?") Coralfish wrote: Jonathan wrote: For instance, there are some that teach if you are not a member of the Roman Catholic Church, you can't be saved... To reply to that simply: They are not in line with the mainstream Roman Catholic teaching. As such, it completely recognizes that those who are in other denominations (yes, denominations) can be saved. To provide an example, at our church we simply don't refer to the protestant denominations as being radically incorrect or even of another religion. They're merely referred to as "Our protestant brothers and sisters." Its recognized as being a difference, but not a cultish one, you see? The official teaching of the Catholic Church is very similar to that of other cults, and that is that if a person has known the Catholic Church is the true church then they must become a Catholic in order to be saved. And if someone is a Catholic then they must remain a Catholic in order to be saved. Coralfish wrote: That's why, generally speaking, Catholics and Jews don't tend to evangalize to other Christians. Why? Because they believe that they have found the truth in Christ and that, denomination aside, that is the most important thing. Ask any Catholic or any Jew. This is the case. Though some emphasis should indeed be placed upon the details seperating us, it should not become the incurable rift that seperates us from what is most important of all. "other Christians"? Jews are Christians? Jews believe we "have found the truth in Christ"? Coralfish wrote: Do Catholics hold God to be the center of their life? Do they hold Scripture to be the inspired Word of God? Do they believe in commmunion with other members, and the building up of faith, family and community? Do they believe that Jesus died to save us from our sins? Do they believe that we sin, and therefore must strive to be better individuals, and thus grow closer to God? Do they believe in death, judgement, Heaven and Hell? The answer (excluding radical factions of individual-not endorsed or held to be in line with church teaching) is yes. How many such responses could you apply to, say, Mormans or Jehova's witnesses or any other cult? Most Mormons and JWs would probably answer yes to all of those questions. But they would have a different definition than evangelical Christians for some of those things, which is an important point. Another important point is, "plus what?" In other words, what does the church add to those things? Just answering yes to those questions does not mean a church is not a cult. As I said, most Mormons and JWs would answer yes to those questions. Jeremy rosie Inquisitive Member Joined: 07 Jan 2003 Posts: 1197 Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 7:04 pm    Post subject: Coralfish: I guess what I meant was, do you think Jews are saved? Nonbaptized christians? Sorry for not really being spacific. Catholosism is NOT a cult. (depending on what cult actually means... in any case, their Christians.) If it was, then for how many centuries was the only form of christianity available in a cult? I know pretty much from personal experience that it really can't be. Even if it's not the way we do things, or even if it's not right, there are reasons behind how it's set up, the traditions, etc. Is everyone who thinks it is a cult repeating stuff from friends and books, or have they really looked into it, and even maybe read some catholic books about it for curiosity? An accurate view, I think, is more often a balanced one. Or a balancedly researched one. Or something. :S Jonathan Dungeon Master Joined: 21 Oct 2004 Posts: 2254 Location: Minnesota and/or North Dakota Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:03 pm    Post subject: rosie wrote: Catholosism is NOT a cult. (depending on what cult actually means... in any case, their Christians.) If it was, then for how many centuries was the only form of christianity available in a cult? I'm not saying it is, b/c I don't know enough on the subject. I will say though that in the two mellenia that the Catholic Church has been around it has changed from time to time. rosie wrote: I know pretty much from personal experience that it really can't be. Even if it's not the way we do things, or even if it's not right, there are reasons behind how it's set up, the traditions, etc. Traditions do not, or rather should not, take a position over what the Bible says for us to do. -Jonathan Amadeo Senior Member Joined: 14 Sep 2003 Posts: 1207 Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:31 pm    Post subject: Jonathan wrote: I will say though that in the two mellenia that the Catholic Church has been around it has changed from time to time. Indeed. That is why we cannot judge modern Catholics based on the history of the Church. There was a time when the Church taught salvation only through itself, but that has changed. Even my secular history book said that Martin Luther was perfectly justified in what he did because of the corruption within the Church at that time. The Reformation brought about the Counter Reformation which worked to solidify beliefs and remove corruption. Whether or not one agrees with the current Church is up to each individual, but one cannot assume that Catholics still believe the sun revolves around the earth, that heretics should be burned, or that progress is at variance with the teachings of the Church. rosie Inquisitive Member Joined: 07 Jan 2003 Posts: 1197 Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 9:38 pm    Post subject: Jonathan: I think you'd be hard pressed to find a true catholic who knows what they believe who'd think traditions are more important than the Bible. hawkeye Linux Geek Joined: 23 Nov 2002 Posts: 2408 Location: Inventors Corner Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:00 pm    Post subject: Jeremy wrote: Jonathan wrote: Jeremy wrote: They fit all of the things I described. If you would like me to try to explain in what ways they fit the things I described, I'll try, but not tonight. ;-) Jeremy Yeah, that's what I meant. An explanation would make it easier for me to understand. -Jonathan Here is a good resource explaining why Catholicism is a cult: http://www.rapidnet.com/~jbeard/bdm/Cults/ (especially the article under "Roman Catholicism" called "Roman Catholicism: Is It A Cult?") Looking at that site, Jeremy, the "Is it a cult?" I note the author points to the dictionary definition cult, and notes that every Christian denomination would fit. Indeed, it would http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cult However, he then points to Webster's dictionary. Not a lot of people have these, now days. But, a copy of the 1828 (original) is available at http://www.christiantech.com/ Now, I note the author says the Webster's dictionary (year unspecified) gives definition, which, is again unable to support his position. I note as well that the online Websters does not have the word 'cult' in it. Fluke, I dont know. Regardless, the author has to turn to extra Biblical and extra dictionary sources to define cult the way he wants to. Clear bias. The position I have come to hold is, if you cant argue it yourself, you ought not argue it until you have studied it better. Also, if credible sources (and the Websters 1828 is hard argue) like the dictionary and/or the Bible dont agree, your fighting an uphill battle. Agree or disagree with this view as you wish. So, you can call whomever you want a cult, until you a have to apply meaning to it. So, how do you define cult? Well, the dictionary is a book of words and their definitions as used by the general society. The dictionary defines a cult as: cult n. 1. 1. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader. 2. The followers of such a religion or sect. 2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual. 3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual. 4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease. 5. 1. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing. 2. The object of such devotion. 6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest. Now, you can reject the common applpied meaning, but that would be as foolish as insisting green was color the sky was on a normal night. So, as the dictionary says one thing, then we should give it fair consideration. True, the dictionary could be in question, but, from what I see, it is correct. Also, as noted, the online Websters does not have the word. Therefore, unless a better source is found, we must use the authorative source; the dictionary. Now, definition 1 is a bit vague and broad. However, you would have your work cut out for you to argue that the Cattheholic church--the arguably largest denomination in the world, is a cult. Im not saying it cannot successfully be argued, but it would be a challenging arguement at best. Definition 4 does not apply either. Definition 4, could, however, be applied to many Christian groups, such as Word of Faith. However, I am not asserting this either way. The other definitions, (excluding 1 and 4) can apply to nearly any religion, Christian religions most especially. However, the word 'cult' is usually slung as an insult, and often by Christians at other similar groups, right or wrong, with whom they do not agree. While I agree there are groups out there that do fit the definition (#1), and as Christians, we are to avoid them as they are not part of the Body of Christ, you must be careful where you apply this, and how broadly. Jeremy wrote: Coralfish wrote: Jonathan wrote: For instance, there are some that teach if you are not a member of the Roman Catholic Church, you can't be saved... To reply to that simply: They are not in line with the mainstream Roman Catholic teaching. As such, it completely recognizes that those who are in other denominations (yes, denominations) can be saved. To provide an example, at our church we simply don't refer to the protestant denominations as being radically incorrect or even of another religion. They're merely referred to as "Our protestant brothers and sisters." Its recognized as being a difference, but not a cultish one, you see? The official teaching of the Catholic Church is very similar to that of other cults, and that is that if a person has known the Catholic Church is the true church then they must become a Catholic in order to be saved. And if someone is a Catholic then they must remain a Catholic in order to be saved. I also note the word "Catholic" has dual meanings; refering to the denomination, and refering to the 'universal' church (i.e. as used in the Nicean Creed) Jeremy wrote: Coralfish wrote: That's why, generally speaking, Catholics and Jews don't tend to evangalize to other Christians. Why? Because they believe that they have found the truth in Christ and that, denomination aside, that is the most important thing. Ask any Catholic or any Jew. This is the case. Though some emphasis should indeed be placed upon the details seperating us, it should not become the incurable rift that seperates us from what is most important of all. "other Christians"? Jews are Christians? Jews believe we "have found the truth in Christ"? Coralfish wrote: Do Catholics hold God to be the center of their life? Do they hold Scripture to be the inspired Word of God? Do they believe in commmunion with other members, and the building up of faith, family and community? Do they believe that Jesus died to save us from our sins? Do they believe that we sin, and therefore must strive to be better individuals, and thus grow closer to God? Do they believe in death, judgement, Heaven and Hell? The answer (excluding radical factions of individual-not endorsed or held to be in line with church teaching) is yes. How many such responses could you apply to, say, Mormans or Jehova's witnesses or any other cult? Most Mormons and JWs would probably answer yes to all of those questions. Actually, Mormans believe the Bible, or what Christians in general consider the Bible to be, is flawed, and the Morman Bible has corrections to this and other testaments. Therefore, they would have to answer no to the second question. And the last question would get, from what I understand, two different answers depending on who in the Morman church you ask. The official doctrine is they believe as Christians do, however, as I find, in past they belived differently. Jehovia's Witnesses would have to say no to question 3, as they gou door to door oftentimes witnessing to even Chritians. And as I gather, at least some, if not most or all, do not believe there is a judgement day, and thus they would have to, and do say no to question number 2 as well. However, I am not brushed up on JW's beliefs, and know this due to indurectly running into some when I was in Mexico on a missions trip. Perhaps they were a deviant group. Jeremy wrote: But they would have a different definition than evangelical Christians for some of those things, which is an important point. Another important point is, "plus what?" In other words, what does the church add to those things? Just answering yes to those questions does not mean a church is not a cult. And what does the Bible say is important? 1 John2:23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also. 1 John 3:24 And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him. And hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit which he hath given us. 1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. 2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: 3 And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. I think Coralfish covered what the above verses say fairly well. And, the verses say if someone does not profess these things, then we are to cut them off. Otherwise, we are being sectarianistic, and, Paul admonishes us several times throughout the Pauline epistles to resist sectarianism as it is carnal, and a sin. So, you are free to disagree with the teachings of the Catholic church, in general or specifcly, but do be careful about the view you hold. I do not agree with the teachings of the Catholic church either, however, that does not mean there cannot be Christians in it, or that any one in it is not Christian. The best definition of cult, imo, is definition 1. Your best arguement would be to say that the Sunday Catholics are the best fit, as they do not look any different from the world when they are not sitting in the church pews. However, that fully applies just as well to too many Christian churches. So, as Amadeo, I cannot agree with praying to the saints--the dead, however, that does not make them a cult. Cultic, perhaps. But, even Christians tread that fine line too easily. Continental Admiral Ornery Member Joined: 14 Nov 2003 Posts: 867 Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:16 pm    Post subject: hawkeye wrote: Actually, Mormans believe the Bible, or what Christians in general consider the Bible to be, is flawed, and the Morman Bible has corrections to this and other testaments. Therefore, they would have to answer no to the second question. And the last question would get, from what I understand, two different answers depending on who in the Morman church you ask. The official doctrine is they believe as Christians do, however, as I find, in past they belived differently. Wait--If someone adds to Scripture, or to the requirements of salvation, isn't that even considered wrong anymore? Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First     The Town Hall Forum Index -> Impolite Company All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next Page 2 of 4 Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group